PDGA survey

[rkbraves]

Wtg Jennifer..!

 

[GMcAtee]

This is what a lot of people are tired of.

I would have a serious problem with a ringer playing against my sister's basketball and softball teams in the special olympics.

So good luck shutting us men up about the trans in female divisions. (I refuse to use that cis- garbage).

The PDGA has lost so much credibility the last few years, and that organization is just too far gone. It all started with the unnecessary rule changes that just muddied it up for most players. In the engineering world, we call it the K.I.S.S. method. Keep it simple. The PDGA can't comprehend that while trying to please too many people (Really going out of their way to please a group of people that may be less than 1%. I'd love to see Southern Nationals or a new sanctioning body develop.

I'm enjoying my popcorn watching this all play out.

 

[Streets]

Oh look, the transphobes logged back in…goodie. :|

 

[foxdawg10]

I would have a serious problem with a ringer playing against my sister's basketball and softball teams in the special olympics.

So good luck shutting us men up about the trans in female divisions. (I refuse to use that cis- garbage).

The PDGA has lost so much credibility the last few years, and that organization is just too far gone. It all started with the unnecessary rule changes that just muddied it up for most players. In the engineering world, we call it the K.I.S.S. method. Keep it simple. The PDGA can't comprehend that while trying to please too many people (Really going out of their way to please a group of people that may be less than 1%. I'd love to see Southern Nationals or a new sanctioning body develop.

I'm enjoying my popcorn watching this all play out.

The sheer level of indoctrination language used in this thread has been a huge turn off and has made me at least reconsider what the options and other positions are. Its tough to sympathize with someone who uses the exact same bullying methodology as the people they are opposing and show utter disrespect in thinking they can define someone else in terms that other person or group of people doesn't accept.

Yes I agree the cis- pronoun is garbage. I am a man. I don't need any other descriptor. And I won't define myself in terms to merely make someone else feel better about themselves.

I sure won't use language to make them feel worse about themselves. But there are a lot of causes and a lot of people out there who are struggling to live the lives they want to live. This is one among many causes.

 

[Hampstead]

So edgy.

 

[foxdawg10]

So edgy.

If you are referring to me, I like to live on the edge, what can I say?

 

[jenb]

Not sure what the WPGA is. If you mean the LPGA their membership voted in 2010 to allow trans players but none have managed to qualify for a Tour Card as of yet.

Yep, I meant LPGA. Good catch. Also, I remember when the LPGA decided to ban transwomen in 2008 after Lana Lawless won the long-drive championship, but I did not know they changed the rule in 2010 to allow transwomen to compete. But more to the point of the original discussion about potential lawsuits, they changed that rule in 2010 because Ms Lawless won a discrimination lawsuit against them!

in 2006, after her gender reassignment, she decided to compete professionally.[2] In 2007, Lawless competed in her first world championship, and returned in 2008 where she won the championship in long-drive golf.[4]

In 2010, Lawless filed a lawsuit against the LPGA for her right to compete as a woman in the world championship. The LPGA had a requirement that athletes must be "female at birth" in order to compete. As a transgender athlete, this meant she would have been ineligible to compete. Lawless argued that this requirement violated California's civil rights law and that transsexual competitors should be allowed to compete as the gender that they identify with.[1] She not only sued the LPGA but also sued Long Drivers of America, two of their sponsors and LPGA's sponsors.[3] Ultimately, Lawless won the lawsuit, and as a result the LPGA reviewed its requirement of having to be born female in order to compete and removed it.

 

[jenb]

in 2006, after her gender reassignment, she decided to compete professionally.[2] In 2007, Lawless competed in her first world championship, and returned in 2008 where she won the championship in long-drive golf.[4]

In 2010, Lawless filed a lawsuit against the LPGA for her right to compete as a woman in the world championship. The LPGA had a requirement that athletes must be "female at birth" in order to compete. As a transgender athlete, this meant she would have been ineligible to compete. Lawless argued that this requirement violated California's civil rights law and that transsexual competitors should be allowed to compete as the gender that they identify with.[1] She not only sued the LPGA but also sued Long Drivers of America, two of their sponsors and LPGA's sponsors.[3] Ultimately, Lawless won the lawsuit, and as a result the LPGA reviewed its requirement of having to be born female in order to compete and removed it.

I think I may have to quibble with the bolded part. My 5 minute google search turned up that the LPGA players voted in 2010 to remove the ban while the suit was pending, and the suit later settled without the LPGA admitting to breaking any laws. So I think the bolded part is misleading.

Still, I'm guessing the discrimination suit at least survived summary judgement or it wouldn't have been pending so long and then settled. That makes the legal issue controlling to the point I don't think the findings of the medical committee or player opinions will factor in. This survey could have been one question.

Q: Are you aware that banning transwomen from competing in FPO would result in the PDGA being sued to death?

Choose at least one answer below:

A: Yes.
B: I do now.

/discussion

 

[discerdoo]

Oh look, the transphobes logged back in…goodie. :|

And the name calling fair play-phobes weigh in as well.

 

[foxdawg10]

And old words get re-defined.

For better and worse.

A word's presence in the dictionary doesn't indicate that the word is true or accurate, it merely means that it's use is widespread enough to give people a place to find it's definition.

Dragon is in the dictionary, as is unicorn.

 

[jenb]

A word's presence in the dictionary doesn't indicate that the word is true or accurate, it merely means that it's use is widespread enough to give people a place to find it's definition.

Dragon is in the dictionary, as is unicorn.

The dictionary definitions of those terms say "mythical." It's misleading to imply that the existence of an dictionary entry for a mythical creature is a representation that the creature exists or ever existed.

 

[foxdawg10]

The dictionary definitions of those terms say "mythical." It's misleading to imply that the existence of an dictionary entry for a mythical creature is a representation that the creature exists or ever existed.

Oh goody, semantics time. That was an inference on your part, not an implication on my part.

 

[ChrisWoj]

I would have a serious problem with a ringer playing against my sister's basketball and softball teams in the special olympics.

So good luck shutting us men up about the trans in female divisions. (I refuse to use that cis- garbage).

The PDGA has lost so much credibility the last few years, and that organization is just too far gone. It all started with the unnecessary rule changes that just muddied it up for most players. In the engineering world, we call it the K.I.S.S. method. Keep it simple. The PDGA can't comprehend that while trying to please too many people (Really going out of their way to please a group of people that may be less than 1%. I'd love to see Southern Nationals or a new sanctioning body develop.

I'm enjoying my popcorn watching this all play out.

Your statements about the PDGA couldn't be further from the truth. The rank and file membership truly doesn't think like you. Even if they agree with you regarding transgender participants, they don't think like you. The PDGA is doing just fine, and hasn't lost credibility - and if anything has gained strength in recent years.

But I'm guessing if the PDGA sees some hit from some random thing in 30 years you'll point to this and start screeching "ITOLDYOUSOOOOooo."

 

[Wayne Mags]

I found this interesting.

 

[jenb]

Wtg Jennifer..!

Thanks!

 

[jenb]

I found this interesting.

I think you might be the last person on dgcr to discover this video

You need landfill access stat

 

[gingerandhoney]

Also talks about sending lab tests (so some proof, which seems quite contrary to the PDGA stance).

How is that different from the PDGA stance, that specifically speaks of needing to provide 3+ qualifying lab tests ( w/r/t testosterone levels be belowe 10 nmol/L ) ?

 

[gingerandhoney]

Yep, I meant LPGA. Good catch. Also, I remember when the LPGA decided to ban transwomen in 2008 after Lana Lawless won the long-drive championship, but I did not know they changed the rule in 2010 to allow transwomen to compete. But more to the point of the original discussion about potential lawsuits, they changed that rule in 2010 because Ms Lawless won a discrimination lawsuit against them!

And, I'll keep pointing it out, that "male at birth" and "female at birth" is done exclusively on the absence or presence of a meaty appendage.

Chromosomes are not verified
Gametes size are not verified
Gonads are not verified
Checking for presence or absence of a womb does not occur
predominant hormones are not verified
sex of the gendered parts of the brain are not verified
cell's receptivity to gendered information carried by proteins is not verified

For anyone interested, check this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szf4hzQ5ztg

For a person to be biologically male, all of these need to point to "male".
For a person to be biologically female, all of these need to point to "female".

Where the "penis check" aligns very well with someone identifying as cisgender (about 98%), it says much less about whether or not someone is actually biologically male or female.
See for instance the most-used "there's only two genders: XX is female, XY is male" trope; which is what kids who get biology are initially taught; just like kids are taught "the sky is blue". Both of which are over-simplified and reductive.

So, as a consequence, making rules and requirementes on whether someone's delivering doctor observed a penis or a vagina (and the result of that verification is what controls which gender marker is placed on their birth certificcate) doesn't actually help.
It literally only checks: "did person X have a penis or a vagina at birth"

 

[denny ritner]

How is that different from the PDGA stance, that specifically speaks of needing to provide 3+ qualifying lab tests ( w/r/t testosterone levels be belowe 10 nmol/L ) ?

That's not what Elaine King said.

 

[gingerandhoney]

Which part of that exact thumbnail says what about what?
It would be more helpful if you attach the appropriate thumbnail. I've been sent all of those screenshots directly, you are showing the incorrect one.